Discharge 2010: 8th, 9th and 10th European Development Funds
Special Report No 11/2010 of the Court of Auditors on the Commission’s Management of General Budget Support in ACP, Latin American and Asian Countries
The report notes deep concern about the Court of Auditors’ finding that the Commission does not appropriately manage the main risks which affect the effective provision of General Budget Support (GBS) twenty years after it first started to provide aid through this instrument.
The report calls on the Commission to engage more systematically in a dialogue with the recipient countries on all aspects of GBS, and urges the Commission to improve its reporting on the effectiveness of its GBS programme, in particular by establishing an appropriate quantitative evaluation method and systematic monitoring of progress against clear indicators and measurable objectives.
Union's aid to Haiti
The report recalls the earthquake in Haiti and its disastrous consequences, and regrets the “insufficient level of coordination of humanitarian aid and development aid”. It is considered that the Commission should direct its efforts and funding to rehabilitation and development in Haiti.
It is regretted that there was insufficient coordination between the Union Delegation and the ECHO (European Commission Humanitarian Aid) representation, and consequentially the report supports a reinforced coordination between all Union actors in the country. The Commission is therefore urged to “ensure better coherence and complementarity between humanitarian aid and development aid” both at a policy level and in practice.
The report deplores the lack of sustainability of some projects and stresses that projects should principally aim at “creating employment and sustainable growth”. This would allow the Haitian State to develop its own economy and depend less on foreign assistance.
Finally it is remarked that EU aid lacks visibility in Haiti, and asks that its name should appear in PR documents rather than simply the Commission or DG ECHO.
The Investment Facility
The report deplores the fact that the Investment Facility is not covered by the Court of Auditors’ Statement of Assurance or the Parliament’s discharge procedure, despite the fact that operations are conducted by the European Investment Bank (EIB) using EDF resources, and on behalf (and at the risk) of the Union. This is described as being politically undesirable. It is stressed that these provisions reduce the scope of Parliament’s powers of discharge, especially considering that EDF resources are derived from public.
The EIB is called upon to link its financing projects more directly to poverty reduction and the achievement of the MDGs, human rights, corporate social responsibility, decent work and environmental principles, democracy, good governance and the setup of companies. Furthermore, it is called upon to reinforce the due diligence on social aspects (including respect for human rights) in its project cycle, both via forecasted analysis and monitoring during project implementation and completion.
The report deplores the lack of transparency concerning the final beneficiaries of the funds from the Investment Facility. It calls on the EIB to apply “stringent enhanced due diligence”, on development-related aspects of projects covered by the Union guarantee.
Lastly, the report calls on the Commission to continue its close monitoring and control of the implementation of the Investment Facility, and to inform Parliament's Committee on Budgetary Control on a regular basis of its findings.
The European Parliament voted to approve the report on the 10th May 2012 with 558 for, 66 against and 14 abstentions.
To read the report click here
Alternatively visit the website at www europarl.europa.eu
Last Updated (Friday, 29 June 2012 09:56)